A New York Times/CBS News poll never lets you down. Today’s survey features a skewed sample (36 percent Democratic, 26 percent Republican), tricky questions, and an emphasis on results likely to thrill liberals and Democrats.

While other polls have Democrats and Republicans roughly even in party identification, the Times/CBS poll gives Democrats a 10-percentage point edge. Also, 20 percent of those questioned have a union member in their household and 25 percent have a government employee. Those are considerably higher percentages of union members and government workers than actually exist in the country.

So the poll is slanted to begin with. And so are several of the questions. There’s this one: “In order to reduce state budgets, do you favor or oppose cutting the pay or benefits of public employees?” Fifty-six percent are opposed, 37 percent are in favor.

But cutting the pay of bureaucrats isn’t what the dispute between Republican governor Scott Walker and public sector unions is about. And pay or benefit cuts are not being proposed by governors in other states.

Walker proposes to raise the contributions by employees – contributions that are quite small at the moment – to their pension and health care benefits in retirement. No cuts are involved. Yes, he wants to end collective bargaining for public employees on their benefits, but not on their pay. Thus, the New York Times is asking about things that aren’t on the table in Wisconsin.

Another question asks what people favor to cut the deficit, but not in a simple tax hikes versus spending cuts manner. Rather, respondents are asked to choose among increasing taxes and three types of spending cuts. Forty percent pick taxes and 22 percent choose cuts in benefits for public workers, 20 percent choose cuts in road and transit financing, and three percent choose cuts in education spending. If you add up the cuts, it comes to 45 percent who prefer reductions in spending. But the Times doesn’t add them up. Its table puts “increase taxes” in first place.

What’s stressed in the Times’s poll story – front page, above the fold – is that 60 percent are opposed to taking away any of the public sector unions’ access to collective bargaining. Thirty-three percent are in favor. This is one aspect of the dispute in which the public is somewhat sympathetic to government workers, but no doubt by a much smaller margin in a poll without a pro-union and Democratic tilt.

And what’s the motive of governors and legislators? It turns out to be close: 45 percent want to reduce deficits, 41 percent to weaken unions. Again, in the real world, the gap is not that close.

HAHAHAHA!What a surprise that partisan Repub Barnes would write such a "skewed" and bogus piece of shit.

FYI - the poll results in the NYT/CBS poll mirror almost EXACTLY what a recent USATODAY/Gallup poll found.

The USATODAY/Gallup poll found that 61% of Americans OPPOSE stripping American workers of their rights, and only 33% approve it.

The NYT/CBS poll found that 60% of Americans OPPOSE stripping workers of their rights, and only 33% approve of it.

The fact that these CREDIBLE pollsters have such strikingly similar results, while the bogus biased and non-credible Rasmussen's poll numbers are so off-base - is just more proof of the bias and BS of Rasmussen.

rickrick91 saidHAHAHAHA!What a surprise that partisan Repub Barnes would write such a "skewed" and bogus piece of shit. ...

Your response would be more credible if you pointed out specifics that are incorrect, and demonstrated your assertion via direct facts. Can you do that, rather than just rant and mention polls whose assumptions you did not state, and could themselves be in question?

Based on Rasmussen's own poll numbers as compared to the poll numbers produced by all the other pollsters during the final three weeks of campaign 2010 - Rasmussen finished DEAD LAST in accuracy, and was the MOST BIASED.

AND LETS NOT POLL WOMEN about ABORTION RIGHTS, SINCE they are the ones who have abortions.

SOCALFITNESS....

We caught you lying last week.....

What an embarrassment to the Republican Party.

And now you post this.

No lying at all, only in this member's delusional mind. (Was extremely upset that I referred to 44 minutes as a few minutes.) He brings up irrelevancies here, typical of disconnected thinking. Only mentioning this for other members. I don't deal with this one. Standards, you know.

Based on Rasmussen's own poll numbers as compared to the poll numbers produced by all the other pollsters during the final three weeks of campaign 2010 - Rasmussen finished DEAD LAST in accuracy, and was the MOST BIASED.

That's called a reality check - for you Repubs.

Never said the other polls were wrong, just that their assumptions could be in question to see if they are consistent with and could refute Barnes. Also, nothing about Rasmussen here.

The fact is, you continue to deflect away from the fact that you simply cannot definitively prove Barnes wrong, so you spin and deflect. Very obvious. You fool no one.

AND LETS NOT POLL WOMEN about ABORTION RIGHTS, SINCE they are the ones who have abortions.

SOCALFITNESS....

We caught you lying last week.....

What an embarrassment to the Republican Party.

And now you post this.

No lying at all, only in this member's delusional mind. (Was extremely upset that I referred to 44 minutes as a few minutes.) He brings up irrelevancies here, typical of disconnected thinking. Only mentioning this for other members. I don't deal with this one. Standards, you know.

You don't deal with him because he calls you out on your BS, and points out the lameness of the comments you post.

He's obviously beaten you, and you've backed down.We can all see that.But if you need to make up BS excuses to make yourself feel better - go for it.

Based on Rasmussen's own poll numbers as compared to the poll numbers produced by all the other pollsters during the final three weeks of campaign 2010 - Rasmussen finished DEAD LAST in accuracy, and was the MOST BIASED.

That's called a reality check - for you Repubs.

Never said the other polls were wrong, just that their assumptions could be in question to see if they are consistent with and could refute Barnes. Also, nothing about Rasmussen here.

The fact is, you continue to deflect away from the fact that you simply cannot definitively prove Barnes wrong, so you spin and delect. Very obvious. You fool no one.

AND LETS NOT POLL WOMEN about ABORTION RIGHTS, SINCE they are the ones who have abortions.

SOCALFITNESS....

We caught you lying last week.....

What an embarrassment to the Republican Party.

And now you post this.

No lying at all, only in this member's delusional mind. (Was extremely upset that I referred to 44 minutes as a few minutes.) He brings up irrelevancies here, typical of disconnected thinking. Only mentioning this for other members. I don't deal with this one. Standards, you know.

You don't deal with him because he calls you out on your BS, and points out the lameness of the comments you post.

He's obviously beaten you, and you've backed down.We can all see that.But if you need to make up BS excuses to make yourself feel better - go for it.

RickRick - You consider yourself a decent, polite forum member. You are displeased when you consider personal attacks made. So I will just tell you this, and not pursue it. The other member on at least a couple of occasions that I am aware of, in political discussions, made disparaging remarks about my age, height, and profile. When someone does that, especially more than once, I disassociate from them. I find someone who does that generally has emotional and/or intellectual issues, and needs to resort to that because of an inability to make points otherwise. There is no challenge in debunking such posters, but I consider that below the standards that should be accepted in the forums.

AND LETS NOT POLL WOMEN about ABORTION RIGHTS, SINCE they are the ones who have abortions.

SOCALFITNESS....

We caught you lying last week.....

What an embarrassment to the Republican Party.

And now you post this.

No lying at all, only in this member's delusional mind. (Was extremely upset that I referred to 44 minutes as a few minutes.) He brings up irrelevancies here, typical of disconnected thinking. Only mentioning this for other members. I don't deal with this one. Standards, you know.

You don't deal with him because he calls you out on your BS, and points out the lameness of the comments you post.

He's obviously beaten you, and you've backed down.We can all see that.But if you need to make up BS excuses to make yourself feel better - go for it.

RickRick - You consider yourself a decent, polite forum member. You are displeased when you consider personal attacks made. So I will just tell you this, and not pursue it. The other member on at least a couple of occasions that I am aware of, in political discussions, made disparaging remarks about my age, height, and profile. When someone does that, especially more than once, I disassociate with them. I find someone who does that generally has emotional and/or intellectual issues, and needs to resort to that because of an inability to make points otherwise. There is no challenge in debunking such posters, but I consider that below the standards that should be accepted in the forums.

When you call out mocktwinkie for doing exactly what you described - more frequently than any other RJ member - then you can claim to be high-minded on the subect of personal attacks.He's the one most guilty of polluting the Forum threads with pointless negative attacks.

AND LETS NOT POLL WOMEN about ABORTION RIGHTS, SINCE they are the ones who have abortions.

SOCALFITNESS....

We caught you lying last week.....

What an embarrassment to the Republican Party.

And now you post this.

No lying at all, only in this member's delusional mind. (Was extremely upset that I referred to 44 minutes as a few minutes.) He brings up irrelevancies here, typical of disconnected thinking. Only mentioning this for other members. I don't deal with this one. Standards, you know.

Can't remember all your lies anymore can you socalfitness.

It was that you said that is was clean after the Beck Rally and that the John Stewart rally were angry people walking around.And I told you I live a mile from both rallies and the Beck rally left a mess and I was at the Stewart rally and It was the most fun afternoon I ever had down on the Mall.

HOW SAD your memory is slipping away....that you can't even remember the lies you tell.

AND LETS NOT POLL WOMEN about ABORTION RIGHTS, SINCE they are the ones who have abortions.

SOCALFITNESS....

We caught you lying last week.....

What an embarrassment to the Republican Party.

And now you post this.

No lying at all, only in this member's delusional mind. (Was extremely upset that I referred to 44 minutes as a few minutes.) He brings up irrelevancies here, typical of disconnected thinking. Only mentioning this for other members. I don't deal with this one. Standards, you know.

Can't remember all your lies anymore can you socalfitness.

It was that you said that is was clean after the Beck Rally and that the John Stewart rally were angry people walking around.And I told you I live a mile from both rallies and the Beck rally left a mess and I was at the Stewart rally and It was the most fun afternoon I ever had down on the Mall.

HOW SAD your memory is slipping away....that you can't even remember the lies you tell.

NY TIMES and CBS have no credibility. They dont even report on members of congress or other representatives calling for "blood" .

AND LETS NOT POLL WOMEN about ABORTION RIGHTS, SINCE they are the ones who have abortions.

SOCALFITNESS....

We caught you lying last week.....

What an embarrassment to the Republican Party.

And now you post this.

No lying at all, only in this member's delusional mind. (Was extremely upset that I referred to 44 minutes as a few minutes.) He brings up irrelevancies here, typical of disconnected thinking. Only mentioning this for other members. I don't deal with this one. Standards, you know.

You don't deal with him because he calls you out on your BS, and points out the lameness of the comments you post.

He's obviously beaten you, and you've backed down.We can all see that.But if you need to make up BS excuses to make yourself feel better - go for it.

RickRick - You consider yourself a decent, polite forum member. You are displeased when you consider personal attacks made. So I will just tell you this, and not pursue it. The other member on at least a couple of occasions that I am aware of, in political discussions, made disparaging remarks about my age, height, and profile. When someone does that, especially more than once, I disassociate with them. I find someone who does that generally has emotional and/or intellectual issues, and needs to resort to that because of an inability to make points otherwise. There is no challenge in debunking such posters, but I consider that below the standards that should be accepted in the forums.

When you call out mocktwinkie for doing exactly what you described - more frequently than any other RJ member - then you can claim to be high-minded on the subect of personal attacks.He's the one most guilty of polluting the Forum threads with pointless negative attacks.

I love it when people talk about in in threads I'm not participating in. It reassures me that 1. I'm a celebrity, 2. the person is threatened, 3. they're losing an argument.

AND LETS NOT POLL WOMEN about ABORTION RIGHTS, SINCE they are the ones who have abortions.

SOCALFITNESS....

We caught you lying last week.....

What an embarrassment to the Republican Party.

And now you post this.

No lying at all, only in this member's delusional mind. (Was extremely upset that I referred to 44 minutes as a few minutes.) He brings up irrelevancies here, typical of disconnected thinking. Only mentioning this for other members. I don't deal with this one. Standards, you know.

Can't remember all your lies anymore can you socalfitness.

It was that you said that is was clean after the Beck Rally and that the John Stewart rally were angry people walking around.And I told you I live a mile from both rallies and the Beck rally left a mess and I was at the Stewart rally and It was the most fun afternoon I ever had down on the Mall.

HOW SAD your memory is slipping away....that you can't even remember the lies you tell.

NY TIMES and CBS have no credibility. They dont even report on members of congress or other representatives calling for "blood" .

They are skewed and biased.

Another mindless ramble with no basis in reality. What Representative called for "blood?" Just post one video wherein a Representative did so without it being a) a joke, b) obvious sarcasm or c) assuming that the pro-union folks might be bloodied.

AND LETS NOT POLL WOMEN about ABORTION RIGHTS, SINCE they are the ones who have abortions.

SOCALFITNESS....

We caught you lying last week.....

What an embarrassment to the Republican Party.

And now you post this.

No lying at all, only in this member's delusional mind. (Was extremely upset that I referred to 44 minutes as a few minutes.) He brings up irrelevancies here, typical of disconnected thinking. Only mentioning this for other members. I don't deal with this one. Standards, you know.

You don't deal with him because he calls you out on your BS, and points out the lameness of the comments you post.

He's obviously beaten you, and you've backed down.We can all see that.But if you need to make up BS excuses to make yourself feel better - go for it.

RickRick - You consider yourself a decent, polite forum member. You are displeased when you consider personal attacks made. So I will just tell you this, and not pursue it. The other member on at least a couple of occasions that I am aware of, in political discussions, made disparaging remarks about my age, height, and profile. When someone does that, especially more than once, I disassociate with them. I find someone who does that generally has emotional and/or intellectual issues, and needs to resort to that because of an inability to make points otherwise. There is no challenge in debunking such posters, but I consider that below the standards that should be accepted in the forums.

When you call out mocktwinkie for doing exactly what you described - more frequently than any other RJ member - then you can claim to be high-minded on the subect of personal attacks.He's the one most guilty of polluting the Forum threads with pointless negative attacks.

I love it when people talk about in in threads I'm not participating in. It reassures me that 1. I'm a celebrity, 2. the person is threatened, 3. they're losing an argument.

LOL!Wow, you took THREE shots at trying to come up with the reason you were referred to - and got ALL THREE WRONG.Three strikes and you're out.

FYI - the actual reason you were referred to, is that the subject of personal attacks came up, and the discussion naturally turned to the person most notorious for launching personal attacks.YOU.

If you think that's something to be PROUD of - you have a faulty sense of what's good and what's bad.

AND LETS NOT POLL WOMEN about ABORTION RIGHTS, SINCE they are the ones who have abortions.

SOCALFITNESS....

We caught you lying last week.....

What an embarrassment to the Republican Party.

And now you post this.

No lying at all, only in this member's delusional mind. (Was extremely upset that I referred to 44 minutes as a few minutes.) He brings up irrelevancies here, typical of disconnected thinking. Only mentioning this for other members. I don't deal with this one. Standards, you know.

You don't deal with him because he calls you out on your BS, and points out the lameness of the comments you post.

He's obviously beaten you, and you've backed down.We can all see that.But if you need to make up BS excuses to make yourself feel better - go for it.

RickRick - You consider yourself a decent, polite forum member. You are displeased when you consider personal attacks made. So I will just tell you this, and not pursue it. The other member on at least a couple of occasions that I am aware of, in political discussions, made disparaging remarks about my age, height, and profile. When someone does that, especially more than once, I disassociate with them. I find someone who does that generally has emotional and/or intellectual issues, and needs to resort to that because of an inability to make points otherwise. There is no challenge in debunking such posters, but I consider that below the standards that should be accepted in the forums.

When you call out mocktwinkie for doing exactly what you described - more frequently than any other RJ member - then you can claim to be high-minded on the subect of personal attacks.He's the one most guilty of polluting the Forum threads with pointless negative attacks.

I love it when people talk about in in threads I'm not participating in. It reassures me that 1. I'm a celebrity, 2. the person is threatened, 3. they're losing an argument.

LOL!Wow, you took THREE shots at trying to come up with the reason you were referred to - and got ALL THREE WRONG.Three strikes and you're out.

FYI - the actual reason you were referred to, is that the subject of personal attacks came up, and the discussion naturally turned to the person most notorious for launching personal attacks.YOU.

If you think that's something to be PROUD of - you have a faulty sense of what's good and what's bad.

I only engage in personal attacks when they are begged for -- and hence, warranted.